Sunday, July 31, 2005

March of the Penguins. Noble and strangely majestic. Succeed against the harshest of odds, strangely human. I really recommend you go see it.

March of the Neocons. Foolish and incapable of learning. Never fail to make the poorest of decisions, even with the world's most powerful military. Depressingly human. I cannot wait for January 20, 2009.

An FBI agent warned superiors in a memo three years ago that U.S. officials who discussed plans to ship terror suspects to foreign nations that practice torture could be prosecuted for conspiring to violate U.S. law, according to a copy of the memo obtained by NEWSWEEK. The strongly worded memo, written by an FBI supervisor then assigned to Guantanamo, is the latest in a series of documents that have recently surfaced reflecting unease among some government lawyers and FBI agents over tactics being used in the war on terror. This memo appears to be the first that directly questions the legal premises of the Bush administration policy of "extraordinary rendition"—a secret program under which terror suspects are transferred to foreign countries that have been widely criticized for practicing torture.

In a memo forwarded to a senior FBI lawyer on Nov. 27, 2002, a supervisory special agent from the bureau's behavioral analysis unit offered a legal analysis of interrogation techniques that had been approved by Pentagon officials for use against a high-value Qaeda detainee. After objecting to techniques such as exploiting "phobias" like "the fear of dogs" or dripping water "to induce the misperception of drowning," the agent discussed a plan to send the detainee to Jordan, Egypt or an unspecified third country for interrogation. "In as much as the intent of this category is to utilize, outside the U.S., interrogation techniques which would violate [U.S. law] if committed in the U.S., it is a per se violation of the U.S. Torture Statute," the agent wrote. "Discussing any plan which includes this category could be seen as a con-spiracy to violate [the Torture Statute]" and "would inculpate" everyone involved.

I can say one thing about my parents, they raised me, but there was a limit to which they would shape their lives around me, or their other children. No effing way would they have ever engaged in such nonsense.

Saturday, July 30, 2005

Before I address some of this weeks questions, a quick note to the Biography Channel.

I saw your program on me at 2:00 a.m., July 27, 2005, and I must say I found your research and findings offensive. First, I have been suspended from from only 37 states, not all of them. Second, the only thing I ever prescribed to Elvis was Banana Sandwiches and a metric ton of Vicodin. Third, it was an accident when I told the Khmer Rouge that the Americans were going to try to release the Mayaguez by force, when I said, "the marines are coming", it was simply an expression, not a policy.

I have a problem. Well, I don't know if it's a problem -- that's why I'm writing to you so that you can enlighten me.

Lately I've been dreaming of Karl Rove. Pink, fat, hairless Karl Rove. In handcuffs. And leg irons. Behind bars. Or flattened under the wheel of Air Force One. Sometimes dream-Karl's on all fours, big white ass up, with an Iraqi citizen standing over him holding a flourescent light. Karl's curly tail twitches when he's scared. This makes me smile. Sometimes dream-Karl's being frog-marched through the gates at Gitmo by Joe and Valerie Wilson. Dream-Karl's always yelling, "I am not a crook!"

The people in my dreams laugh at dream-Karl's troubles. Some shout that payback's a bitch and her name's Val P. One guy taped a note to the back of Karl's orange jumpsuit that read, "I'm Bush's Brain and all I got was prison."

I always wake up laughing, and hoping my dream was for real. Is that wrong?

No, your dream is not wrong at all. However, reading it I felt like I was reading a letter to Penthouse.

I would not say that it is wrong at all to dream this, but still, I do not think you are having vivid enough dreams. There is not enough forcible sodomy and wimpering.

But that's just me.

Question No. 2:

Dear Dr. Attaturk:

What happens when the government, its apologists and its propagandists construct a world in which fealty to the Leader trumps loyalty to a nation’s legal and democratic traditions and ideals? When they construct a world in which each citizen is either with em or against em? Where every citizen either is uncritically and unquestioningly with their program and policies or they're a traitor? When the mechanisms of the state have been used to disenfranchise the majority? And citizen is set against citizen?

I believe that country becomes one in which movies in Aramaic become grotesquely profitable and Carrot-Top can make money. It becomes a country where serving in the military is a sign of cowardice, but being a leather-faced tan-addict is a sign of "having a good heart".

Friday, July 29, 2005

President Bush intends to announce next week that he is going around Congress to install embattled nominee John Bolton as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, senior administration officials said Friday.

Bush has the power to fill vacancies without Senate approval while Congress is in recess. Under the Constitution, a recess appointment during the lawmakers' August break would last until the next session of Congress, which begins in January 2007.

Two officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because the president had not made the announcement and Congress wasn't in recess yet, said Bush planned to exercise that authority before he leaves Washington on Tuesday for his ranch. The House recessed on Thursday and the Senate's break was scheduled to begin later Friday.

Sure he's a lying son-of-a-bitch that is the last person who should ever be in place.

So why should he be the only Bush Administration officer not to get the job anyway?

Thanks to Crooks & Liars (see original and you'll understand what is below):

"It wouldn't be out of the question for them to have singled out and sponsored an obscure Austrian Corporal to appear as a German. Say someone with some dislike for say, the Jews and Slavs, and say claim you know, that they caused us to lose the last war, so we're gonna win the next one and kill off those people to get public opinion on their side. Let's dress this guy up, tell him to act completely nuts and if he can, have him almost win that war, and then he appears so guilty of stuff that we let his victims start their own nation than we let the British and American's support, all of which will allow Islam to build up anger, enabling us to start a movement to defeat them and then fly airplanes into their corporate symbolic edifices. It is truly a subtle, yet brilliant, plan that they have laid out over the past seventy years."

"It must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance approaching to genius, he can't get anyone to notice. He is like a great painter or musician who is ahead of his time, and who unveils one masterpiece after another to a reception that, when not bored, is hostile."

When the Brotherhood of Dolts got together and picked out their "special powers" it might have been nice if Bush had picked a really cool superpower, instead of really sucky ones, like the power to set freeper hearts a flutter. He's the AquaMan of Idiots.

Thursday, July 28, 2005

Maybe people come here sometimes for a respite from asking for money to candidates...though I doubt it. I think it is a more primal reason which is that people love to see smartassed, but lousy, photoediting that others would be too ashamed of actually putting up on their blogs. But not Atta J. Turk, he's got the purity of low standards going for him.

Republican nominee Jean Schmidt, a former state representative, has criticized Hackett for saying several weeks ago that Bush was a greater threat to U.S. security than al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. "The people of this district couldn't disagree more," says Schmidt, 53.

Hackett is unapologetic. "I've said that I don't like the son-of-a-b—— that lives in the White House but I'd put my life on the line for him," he says.

I used to be a prominant socialist writer; taking on the sacred cows of one institution after another. Then a necessity for a certain lifestyle mandated that I change my stripes -- and I really love me some war and being critical of Mother Teresa.

Appearance

I'm a full-bodied man, looking for a supermodel, who finds the scent of turkish cigarrettes and sweat intoxicating.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I think it is time for Dr. Atta J. Turk to list himself at some conservative websites, lookin' for the conservative brand of very boring sex. However, I need to update my profile, and that is hard to do for a pseudonym. Perchance you can help me out with some suggested characteritics...especially in the area of "interests", what interest could I have that would attract the interest of your typical conservative lady?

Thanks for any suggestions you may have, and I'll let you know when and if I can get posted on the Hannidate.

About 300 people, most of them Boy Scouts, were sickened by the heat Wednesday while waiting for President Bush to arrive at a memorial service for four Scout leaders who were killed while pitching a tent beneath a power line.

The president's visit to the Scout Jamboree at Fort A.P. Hill was postponed because of severe thunderstorms and strong wind. Instead, Bush is scheduled to visit the gathering Thursday.

But before the president's appearance was called off, many Scouts fell ill from temperatures that rose into the upper 90s, made worse by high humidity.

Senior military lawyers lodged vigorous and detailed dissents in early 2003 as an administration legal task force concluded that President Bush had authority as commander in chief to order harsh interrogations of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, newly disclosed documents show.

Despite the military lawyers' warnings, the task force concluded that military interrogators and their commanders would be immune from prosecution for torture under federal and international law because of the special character of the fight against terrorism.

In memorandums written by several senior uniformed lawyers in each of the military services as the legal review was under way, they had urged a sharply different view and also warned that the position eventually adopted by the task force could endanger American service members.

The memorandums were declassified and released last week in response to a request from Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina. Mr. Graham made the request after hearings in which officers representing the military's judge advocates general acknowledged having expressed concerns over interrogation policies.

The documents include one written by the deputy judge advocate general of the Air Force, Maj. Gen. Jack L. Rives, advising the task force that several of the "more extreme interrogation techniques, on their face, amount to violations of domestic criminal law" as well as military law.

General Rives added that many other countries were likely to disagree with the reasoning used by Justice Department lawyers about immunity from prosecution. Instead, he said, the use of many of the interrogation techniques "puts the interrogators and the chain of command at risk of criminal accusations abroad."

Any such crimes, he said, could be prosecuted in other nations' courts, international courts or the International Criminal Court, a body the United States does not formally participate in or recognize.

Other senior military lawyers warned in tones of sharp concern that aggressive interrogation techniques would endanger American soldiers taken prisoner and also diminish the country's standing as a leader in "the moral high road" approach to the laws of war.

The memorandums provide the most complete record to date of how uniformed military lawyers were frequently the chief dissenters as government officials formulated interrogation policies.

"These military lawyers were clearly disturbed by the proposed techniques that were deviations from past practices that were being advocated by the Justice Department," said Senator Graham, himself a former military lawyer.

Meanwhile, the demonstrative effects of the policy that these lawyers objected to is out there in pictures already released, and especially in that documentation the Bush Administration still finds excuses for not releasing.

Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Famed editor Jason Epstein, husband of jailed New York Times reporter Judith Miller, has lately been making himself scarce at the federal facility in Virginia where his wife has been incarcerated for the past three weeks...

In a frothy social column yesterday about a celeb-glutted Mediterranean cruise, featuring everyone from Isabella Rossellini to J.K. Rowling aboard the ocean liner Silver Shadow, the New York Sun's A.L. Gordon revealed:

"One passenger with his mind soberly on home is the literary icon Jason Epstein. ... Ms. Miller would have been on the cruise had she not gone to jail."

American voters disapprove of the job President George W. Bush is doing 53 - 41 percent, his lowest approval rating since becoming President. This compares to a 50 - 44 percent disapproval in a May 25 Quinnipiac University poll.

Of course, many Bush supporters are "factose intolerant". Let's just say that facts make Cliff May and John Podhoretz all gassy (um, gassier). Facts are so obnoxious to those who do not read the Wall Street Journal for laughs that they are incapable of reading the rest of the paper.

Below we discussed a few of those fictions that are inpenetrable of facts, namely that Valerie Plame was IN FACT an undercover operative of the CIA ... and also within the article is a second FACT exposing a drumbeaten lie, Wilson's assertion of who sent him to Niger.

But here is another, the fact that Joe Wilson was absolutely right about Iraq NOT seeking yellow-cake uranium in Niger. There are plenty of places for proof of this, but let's go with the Duelfer Report, something that no Taranto or Doughy Pantload fan can stand to read -- being based upon factual information and all.

ISG has not found evidence to show that Iraq sought uranium from abroad after 1991 or renewed indigenous production of such material—activities that we believe would have constituted an Iraqi effort to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program. As part of its investigation, ISG sought information from prominent figures such as Ja’far Diya’ Ja’far—the head of the pre-1991 nuclear weapons program.

According to Ja’far, the Iraqi government did not purchase uranium from abroad following its acquisition of yellowcake from Niger in 1981. However, Iraq also purchased uranium dioxide from Brazil in 1982. Iraq declared neither the Brazilian purchase nor one of the Niger purchases to the IAEA—demonstrating that the Iraqi Regime was willing to pursue uranium illicitly.

Regarding specific allegations of uranium pursuits from Niger, Ja’far claims that after 1998 Iraq had only two contacts with Niamey—neither of which involved uranium. Ja’far acknowledged that Iraq’s Ambassador to the Holy See traveled to Niamey to invite the President of Niger to visit Iraq. He indicated that Baghdad hoped that the Nigerian President would agree to the visit as he had visited Libya despite sanctions being levied on Tripoli. Former Iraqi Ambassador to the Holy See Wissam Zahawie has publicly provided a similar account.

Ja’far claims a second contact between Iraq and Niger occurred when a Nigerian minister visited Baghdad around 2001 to request assistance in obtaining petroleum products to alleviate Niger’s economic problems. During the negotiations for this contract, the Nigerians did not offer any kind of payment or other quid pro quo, including offering to provide Iraq with uranium ore, other than cash in exchange for petroleum.

ISG recovered a copy of a crude oil contract dated 26 June 2001 that, although unsigned, appears to support this arrangement.

So far, ISG has found only one offer of uranium to Baghdad since 1991—an approach Iraq appears to have turned down. In mid-May 2003, an ISG team found an Iraqi Embassy document in the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) headquarters related to an offer to sell yellowcake to Iraq. The document reveals that a Ugandan businessman approached the Iraqis with an offer to sell uranium, reportedly from the Congo. The Iraqi Embassy in Nairobi—in reporting this matter back to Baghdad on 20 May 2001—indicated it told the Ugandan that Iraq does not deal with these materials, explained the circumstances of sanctions, and said that Baghdad was not concerned about these matters right now. Figure 1 is the translation of this document.

In other words, findings that are exactly on point (and much broader) with the findings of one Joseph Wilson.

As Digby points out, not content with just making bankruptcy pretty much a permanent form of servitude, the Bush Administration is now encouraging and enabling major credit card companys to DOUBLE the amount they charge as minimum monthly payments, therefore likely driving more people than ever into bankruptcy.

*PRICELESS*

This hits the poor and the middle class right in the pocketbook, all for the purpose of helping Georgie (and JOE BIDEN'S) buddies.

Like Digby, I think this is a hell of a campaign issue for progressives.

Harlow, the former CIA spokesman, said in an interview yesterday that he testified last year before a grand jury about conversations he had with Novak at least three days before the column was published. He said he warned Novak, in the strongest terms he was permitted to use without revealing classified information, that Wilson's wife had not authorized the mission and that if he did write about it, her name should not be revealed.

Harlow said that after Novak's call, he checked Plame's status and confirmed that she was an undercover operative. He said he called Novak back to repeat that the story Novak had related to him was wrong and that Plame's name should not be used. But he did not tell Novak directly that she was undercover because that was classified information.

And we get an additional window into the narrow mind of Bobby Nofacts:

In a strange twist in the investigation, the grand jury -- acting on a tip from Wilson -- has questioned a person who approached Novak on Pennsylvania Avenue on July 8, 2003, six days before his column appeared in The Post and other publications, Wilson said in an interview. The person, whom Wilson declined to identify to The Post, asked Novak about the "yellow cake" uranium matter and then about Wilson, Wilson said. He first revealed that conversation in a book he wrote last year. In the book, he said he tried to reach Novak on July 8, and they finally connected on July 10. In that conversation, Wilson said he did not confirm his wife worked for the CIA but that Novak told him he had obtained the information from a "CIA source."

Novak told the person that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA as a specialist in weapons of mass destruction and had arranged her husband's trip to Niger, Wilson said. Unknown to Novak, the person was a friend of Wilson and reported the conversation to him, Wilson said.

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Some of you may remember the post that received more attention on this blog than any other I've ever done -- about 90,000 hits in one day's worth. That was the story of one Phil Parlock, Republican Activist and systematic "victim" of democratic abuse.

Well, we may have another item sliding towards that item.

Many of you have heard about the funeral of a Pennsylvania Marine and how the Democratic Lieutenant Governor Catherine Baker Knoll "crashed" the funeral and is alleged to have stated "'our government' is against the war".

Sounds just dastardly right?

Well, hold on a second. Condolences are certainly in order to the family of the Marine, Staff Sgt. Joseph Goodrich, and I can certainly understand their grief. If Knoll did what was alleged, then she deserves all sorts of scorn.

H-0-W-E-V-E-R

The particular person making these allegations against Knoll as to what she said, Rhonda Goodrich (the deceased Sister-in-Law) has a particular axe to grind herself.

Now, it is quite possible that Ms. Knoll could have handled things better, and obviously a funeral is a traumatic event. But it is also one where items can be magnified to expand one's prejudices.

And it may have happened here.

I'm guessing that Rush Limbaugh though has gotten six hours of material out of it, that's what they do.

UPDATE: Rhonda Goodrich intends to go on FoxNews to talk about the story some more...OF COURSE SHE'S GOING ON FOXNEWS...where else would this story be trumpeted. I'm sure it will make the balance of O'Reilly and Hannity & Speedbump as well. Ms. Goodrich just happens to be perusing blogs today to see how often her name is mentioned as well. I'm sure she'll be here soon, if she hasn't already.

I know you've been busy of late, what with the overturning of five-hundred and fifty years of scientific advances (something I'm sure will win back those European strays) so forgive me if I take up your time on other matters.

In regard to the constant habit of GOP candidates to allow folks to spin that Democrats who actually served in the military are cowards, or did not really "serve" as much as others. This almost inevitably comes from folks that did not serve in the military at all.

It is a CONSTANT fucking drumbeat that has been going on for ages, not just from the Swiftboat fucknuts against Kerry.

It happens here in Iowa everytime that Tom Harkin runs for reelection. Harkin was a pilot in the Navy who served in the Vietnam Theatre. Harkin was not a combat pilot, but saw regular duty as a service pilot, in other words flying damaged planes from an airbase to and from aircraft carriers, he also saw other service as a Naval Pilot.

Anyone who has ever flown as a Naval "Aviator" can tell you that this is not exactly easy, or safe work. Harkin served in a combat zone no less than any non-aviator on a carrier in Vietnam, given the power of the vietcong's navy, yet somehow this is used as an attempt to diminish Harkin's service and question his patriotism, all in the guise of "he puffed up his record". As opposed to the "Badass of TANG"?

Is pervasive in this piece from the Washington Post, but at least it exposes Victoria Toensing as the partisan hack she is. Bitter Toensing and her other half hack Joseph DiGenova have been poisoning the well for a generation now. It would be nice if more than just bloggers would call them out on their partisan bullshit.

If Pat Robert's wasn't such a repellent douchebag. Uber Josh has more:

I've told you many times how Sen. Pat Roberts (R) of Kansas, Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is a shame to the office, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the White House political operation if there ever was one.

The July 2004 report on Iraqi WMD should be enough to make the point.

But now there's more.

Note that there are no congressional investigations into the origin of the Niger forgeries, the outing of Valerie Plame, and countless other scandals and mysteries large and small. (Remember, after the 2004 election, Roberts announced that there's now not enough time for the investigation into possible political manipulation of Iraqi WMD intel, which he promised prior to the election.)

But now there will be congressional hearings into whether the CIA does a good enough job at protecting the 'cover' of its agents in its Directorate of Operations.

It's necessary to unpack this one to see just what a lickspittle the Senator from Kansas really is.

...based on conversations with non-political types, how many now believe that the publication of the name of any person working for the CIA is a felony. It isn't. There are tens of thousands of people in Washington who, if you meet them, will say, "I work for the CIA." And if you then tell your friend Mabel about that person, you haven't broken the law either.

Maybe that should be the law. It would simplify matters, even though such a law might conceivably run afoul of the First Amendment. If it were a law, there would be no doubt as to the guilt of about fifty people in this case. But then, it would also be the case that Valerie Plame Wilson's own husband would be guilty of that felony, having named her in his own online bio.

Except DUMBASS, Joe Wilson did not say in his bio that his wife Valerie "worked for the CIA", he merely stated he was married to the former Valerie Plame -- who to the world was an energy consultant for Brewster & Jennings -- which turned out to be a CIA front operation.

It is not just that he's Bushes "brain"; nor that he is owed a debt for building up Bush into the Presidency.

It is because Bush knew full well what Rove was doing the whole time. Rove gets indicted he'll have to leave, but until then, to dump Rove means the latter won't be the good soldier and spill the beans on how Karl and Georgie worked together to play some dirty tricks on a CIA Operative, which would mean the end of George Bush's Presidency and the GOP for a generation or two, for all intensive purposes.

Bush has always been a dirtier fighter than his father, just as there is no reason to believe he wasn't aware of Rove's earlier dirty tricks, there is no reason to think otherwise now, he has, at this time plausible deniability, but if he shits on Rove, he knows Rove will make him "fair game".

On Friday of July 4, 2003, the Wilsons and I walked down Reservoir Road to MacArthur Boulevard for the annual Palisades neighborhood parade. The parade is a very small town kind of affair, with people marching their dogs in red, white and blue costumes and the local fire engines driving by with the crew throwing candy to the kids. As we watched, someone remarked that Karl Rove was down the street watching the parade. Little did I know then the role Rove would play in the Wilsons' lives.

As we walked back from the parade, the war in Iraq came up in conversation. Joe said he wanted to show me something he had just written. When we returned home, he handed me the draft of an article he said was going to be published in Sunday's New York Times entitled, "What I Didn't Find in Africa." When I read it, I knew this was going to be news: the first real challenge to the administration's rationale for war.

That surprise was nothing compared with the shock I experienced 10 days later. On that sunny Monday morning, I was sitting outside at the table on my deck, having breakfast and reading The Washington Post. When I turned to the op-ed pages, I noticed a column by Novak entitled "Mission to Niger," addressing Joe's op-ed the previous week. I was stunned to read that "Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction," citing two administration officials as sources.

Stricken reaction

As I finished reading the column, Joe ventured out onto his deck and offered a neighborly hello. I held up the paper and yelled over, "I had no idea about Valerie!" Joe looked stricken and gestured to me to keep my voice down. I immediately realized the "outing" of Valerie as a covert CIA operative had had a devastating effect on the Wilson family. In the weeks to follow, I came to understand just how harrowing the disclosure was. Obviously, the identification of Valerie meant an end to her decades-long career. It also meant the country had lost an essential part of the services provided by someone who was an expert on weapons of mass destruction.

Except for those WILFULLY maintaining ignorance, for example this guy...

I was going to write about this article in the New York Times, but hell Billmon did so much more with it, that I'll just link to him and highlight this portion:

It would have been nice, if only for a change of pace, if Burns and his fellow correspondents had let their readers know at the time that the "new team" was deeply pessimistic about U.S. propects in Iraq, and already worried about the threat of civil war -- a threat those same officials were dismissing as "beyond the fringe" in their on-the-record briefings.

What Burns has given us, in other words, is a glimpse behind the curtain that divides what reporters in the quasi-official media actually know from what they are willing to say in print or on the air. And what we see looks a hell of a lot like the cozy insider relationships revealed when Patrick Fitzgerald pulled back the curtain on the White House press operation -- or, to use a more accurate metaphor, when he turned over the rock.

I guess we'll have to wait until this time next year to find out what official Baghdad sources are telling the New Pravda now. I'm going to guess it will be something along the lines of: "We knew the civil war had already begun, but we couldn't get anyone in Washington to listen. They were too busy trying to figure out who was leaking what to whom about the Plame investigation."

In Washington the clubby dinner parties and access are everything, one can only imagine that the same things are true in Iraq on a lesser scale, with the added element of maintaining one's personal safety. And John F. Burns is yet one of the better reporters.

JACK Straw, the Foreign Secretary, yesterday stepped back from his earlier denials that the war on Iraq had nothing to do with the terror attacks in London.

The Prime Minister, Tony Blair, was believed to be incensed at Mr Straw's refusal to admit that the two events could be linked last week, as he believed this clashed with wider public opinion.

Political sensitivities over the bombings are at an all-time high and were underlined by a poll which showed that support for Mr Blair's handling of the crisis had dropped by 14 per cent in just two weeks.

WAR ON BRITAIN: 85% BLAME BOMBS ON WAR IN IRAQ EXCLUSIVE By Rosa Prince, Political Correspondent

AN overwhelming 85 per cent of people blame the Iraq invasion for the London bombings, a Daily Mirror/GMTV poll reveals today.

The survey is a hammer blow to Tony Blair, who insists Britain's role in the war had nothing to do with the 7/7 terror attacks.

His words were greeted with incredulity by critics who are convinced Muslim anger on Iraq has fuelled Islamic extremism. And now that view has been borne out by our YouGov poll

In all, 23 per cent said the war was the main reason for the London bombings. Another 62 per cent believe that while Iraq was not the principle cause, it did contribute to the reasons behind the atrocities.

Sunday, July 24, 2005

Well here I am with my first dispatch from deep into the heart of wealth and priviledge as well as sand, fun, and beach. While I am working on my tan and buying very expensive drinks and food, I am spying on the powerful, right-wing, and gosh... tan. Very tan. And not the red tint variety either... these people are deep brown tanned. Anyways, where was I...

So day one has gone uneventfully. With the exception of many, many SUVs, mini-vans, and expensive cars in all of the parking lots, I am getting along ok. Man, these people don't have to worry about the ever expanding cost of gas do they? I saw my first $200,000 dollar sports car today. And the guy who was driving just ran into the supermarket (I guess I should say servicemarket as this store had a concierge desk). He bought quite a bit of expensive booze and left the car running in front of the walkway. In fact, if I hadn't stopped for him, he might have hit me. He came out with two arms full of liquor and drove away.

On another point: The beaches here are quite nice and have lifeguards every 50 feet or so. The beaches are sandy white and smooth and there are no waste baskets. I wonder who has to clean these beaches up?

Anyway, I have done a lot of eavesdropping and I have heard absolutely nothing about politics, religion, or anything resembling socio-political commentary. The closest I found were some mothers on the beach disagreeing about some brand of diaper and diaper service -- neither one have I ever heard of before. Hell, pampers were good enough for my kids.

There are however many commentaries on bumpers and in windows of cars. There are many W stickers and those Bush-Cheney clings and sticky things that peel off. In fact, I drove around for about an hour today and I did not see one Kerry sticker! I mean it, I had my better half drive the car so I could look, really look hard. And I did not see one. I did count over 288 Bush stickers of one kind of another though!! Wow, the demographic on that must be off the friggin' charts. But I forget where I am.

Tomorrow I am planning on going to some areas where I might catch some commentary: the shops and concerts that are going to happen all over Richman'sland on Monday. Boy, these people look and act different though. It is hard to put my finger on it. They read at the beach -- mostly mysteries -- from what I can tell but in any over heard conversation they talk about mundane matters and none of the televisions in stores, banks, and other places are on news. They are on the weather channel. Every single one of them.

What else can I mention? Oh yeah, and they have kids, although relatively few from my walk-arounds today. But I get this very odd vibe from them. It is hard to put into words. I will think about it and get back to you all tomorrow.

So for today, they voted Bush and like his stickers, drink a lot, are not very careful drivers of large or fast automobiles, and don't talk politics. Not much I know but this far at least not enough to generate hate for them... yet.

A former U.S. Navy Vietnam Veteran, has sent us the following "random thoughts on this great country that was once called America." The war in Iraq, working-class people in the military, and the bombings in the U.K. are part of these thoughts and are worth noting here on the Rising Hegemon.

This submission touches on the broader relationship between social class, the military, and nationalism. For working-class young men (and now women), joining the military is often seen as a respectable career path, a backdoor to the 'American Dream.' Reflecting the disillusionment of many Vietnam veterans, this commentator observes the false illogic of linking violence and warfare with the notions of freedom and prosperity. At minimum, it's worth a read.

Monsters Fighting Monsters

The only thing I am sure of is that we are caught in the middle of two equally guilty monsters that kill large numbers of people in the name of their god. I hate the Islamic zealots coming out of Arabia to kill innocent human beings; I also hate what the administration is doing to Iraq. When Bush talks about evil, he has to tuck his tail in before someone sees it. When Blair tells the Brits they are standing up for freedom around the world, he too must hide his horns. The longer we stay in Iraq the worse this is going to get, we will kill more and more innocents and say---sorry we did not intentionally kill you.

Americans are just waking up to the sad story that everything they believe in is gone, we have few freedoms left, and in the coming months and years we will lose more. We have been caught red-handed torturing human beings, we have bombed cities to the point of killing hundreds of women and children and we don't even bother to count the dead. The Islamic zealots are not better than we are, they are just weaker. The thing that should scare the hell out of you is that we have not been attacked again.

Our borders are easy to go across, our trains and buses are almost totally vulnerable, our ports are wide open and our air traffic security is a joke. We spend billions on checking little old ladies and almost nothing on the cargo that goes on the plane. What a mess. All these items have been on the news, yet still nothing gets done, we can react and that's all folks.

We now have high-level administration officials outing CIA undercover operatives. Has anyone asked the question, why anyone would want to go undercover for this government knowing that they could be made not by the bad guys but by the good guys. Rove should be arrested and tried for treason. Just random thoughts on this great country that was once called America.

And this person voted for Bush in the past election; wow, things must be falling apart among Bush supporters. Or at least, one can hope.

Well, after these many moons of trying to deal with the arrogance of the Rove deserves a medal crowd, I Dirk D. DeDurkheim have decided to go deep undercover into richman'sland. Now what I have done is under the guise of a family vacation, I have ventured into a richman'sland beach getaway.

I am here to discover why the GOP, far right-wingers and others are so ignorant of the facts, why they support their guys such as Bush and Cheney and Rove even after they have committed crimes, and try to figure out ways to stop their evil agenda for tomorrow.

As I figure, it is a lot easier than going to the Republican national convention where I had to deal with Crazy Ann Coulter or kill 'em all Michael Savage.

I will regularly report my activities and findings to all of you, dear readers of the Rising Hegemon, so that we can all understand the bizarre and unique thinking of the right-wing.

This is a must read my music loving friends! Several interesting if short commentaries about the most influential musicians and bands on some creative music makers from Magnet Magazine.

And I have few quibbles with some of the comments. You all know me and that I can be quite particular about music but I've long preached an expansive definition of power pop music... But Faith No More's "Epic"? Really? If Faith No More's "Epic" is power pop then so is "Enter Sandman" by Metallica.

Good going Todd Rundgren and NRBQ!

Did anyone out there in Rising Hegemon world go to see the Raspberries in New York this weekend? If so, please report back....

Why do I find the notion of a Rolling Stones tour repellent, yet I'd go see the Kinks or Who even today, quite willingly?

I mean the Who hasn't made a record in more than 20 years, and they all are pretty much as old as the members of the Stones. Is it because the Kinks were always a less pretentious band and the Who always are more serious, more pissed off one?

I dunno, all I know is that I have always found Ray Davies a most likeable chap; and no matter how long it has been since they've made something new Mssrs. Daltrey and Townsend still blow other acts away when it comes to intensity. Maybe it is just me.

Of course, I'm now a middle-aged fart too. DeDurkheim is the music guy, I've never been a audiophile.

So much for the window into my tastes...here's a picture of an asshole.Had other priorities, but served by enjoying "Ballad of the Green Berets"

Atrios noted the 12-Hour Gap that Frank Rich discusses in his column today, but this is also something that really struck me when Rich was discussing the events of two years ago:

That memo may have been the genesis of an orchestrated assault on the Wilsons. That the administration was then cocky enough and enraged enough to go after its presumed enemies so systematically can be found in a similar, now forgotten attack that was hatched on July 15, the day after the publication of Mr. Novak's column portraying Mr. Wilson as a girlie man dependent on his wife for employment.

On that evening's broadcast of ABC's "World News Tonight," American soldiers in Falluja spoke angrily of how their tour of duty had been extended yet again, only a week after Donald Rumsfeld told them they were going home. Soon the Drudge Report announced that ABC's correspondent, Jeffrey Kofman, was gay. Matt Drudge told Lloyd Grove of The Washington Post at the time that "someone from the White House communications shop" had given him that information.

Mr. McClellan denied White House involvement with any Kofman revelation, a denial now worth as much as his denials of White House involvement with the trashing of the Wilsons. Identifying someone as gay isn't a crime in any event, but the "outing" of Mr. Kofman (who turned out to be openly gay) almost simultaneously with the outing of Ms. Plame points to a pervasive culture of revenge in the White House and offers a clue as to who might be driving it. As Joshua Green reported in detail in The Atlantic Monthly last year, a recurring feature of Mr. Rove's political campaigns throughout his career has been the questioning of an "opponent's sexual orientation."

In Rick Atkinson's recent Pulitzer Prize winning book, "An Army At Dawn" there is a specific reference about Dwight Eisenhower that particularly seems to apply across the spectrum of American History:

"One of the fascinations of the war was to see how the Americans develop their great men so quickly"

There is no doubt that much of the "greatness" of individuals is a combination of depth of crisis and success in meeting it, with a liberal portion of fawning propoganda added to the mix. But a review of American History does reveal that in our history great crisis have produced great individuals, and we have been fortunate in their being chosen by and large, though not always.

Out of the Revolutionary War came the huge number of historical giants, some far too steeped in myth, some so awash in it that we lose the person to the myth and the examination goes to others. George Washington is built up to the point where most people find him positively dull, especially when compared to the deeply flawed, but brilliant Jefferson, and the poisoned-pen John Adams. Washington seems a marble bust waiting to happen, too perfect for us to even contemplate.

Forget the fact that Washington was quite imperfect, a slave owner who detested slavery far more than Jefferson ever did; an average tactician of a general who was nonetheless a very sound strategist; and an extremely ambitious man who repeatedly hid his ambition in the cloak of being above being ambitious. Few were ever more accomplished and more complicated, and had more of their humanity drained out of them by immortalization.

The Civil War gave us Lincoln, the depressive; Grant the alcoholic; and even on the losing side, Robert E. Lee, who lost, but lost with grace. Americans love a good loser, especially if he is a vessel into which the foolishness of their cause can be excused.

And it goes on and on and on.

Which brings us to today.

I know I'm a liberal and a democrat, but I still think I have the capability to distinguish great times from non-great times. Further, in our history there have been great "Conservatives" as well as "Liberals", Washington, Hamilton, Adams, Eisenhower all great men in a conservative's garment.

And what do we have today?

I may have seen a "great historical" moment in September 11, 2001, but it takes petty and small people to turn huge moments in history into what we have today. I certainly am willing to call Bush's Administration many things, as are Conservatives, but it takes a first-rate disillusionment, nay a serious psychological disorder, to call George W. Bush "great". Naive, sure; a martinet, you bet; an empty suit, uh-huh. That would be tolerable if he was supported by decent individuals, but alas, we have Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and Condi Rice. The "four horsemen of the fuckupolypse".

Saturday, July 23, 2005

It is telling that the insection of Bloodlust Street & War Mongering Avenue prattles on about a poll on the feelings of British Muslims, yet says nothing about the fact that the man killed, aparently in cold blood, on Friday was not Middle Eastern, not a terrorist, but was killed because, as a Brazilian there were communication problems.

People cannot seem to fathom that while those who practice terror are bloodthirsty murderers, sometimes we are as well. BOTH societies have fundamental problems, if we were more honest about ours, perhaps we would be in a better position to demand accountability from other cultures.

But surely the fact that more than 80 people died in Egyptian bombings has been getting the same wall-to-wall coverage and reports about what American authorities are doing respectively in this country, right?

Rush's second best little buddy (after these) is certainly using his spot in the New York Times to try excuse Rush for on a doctor shopping charge. That is two consecutive microscopically-thin veiled columns that excuse Rush Limbaugh.

One would think the "Gray Lady" would not be so enthusiastic about using their paper to do favors for your friends.

I'm an adult may in late middle ages. It appears that there is a possibility of some incarceration time for me in the near future. Do you think I can survive prison?

Thanks,

Scooter

Dear Scooter,

With a nickname like Scooter, I imagine you will like prison just fine. Who would ever think of making a guy with that nickname a prison biatch? Now, if you had a nickname like 'Turdblossom' I don't think things would be so rosy for you. If I were you, I'd memorize this phrase.

"I beg your pardon."

Question No. 2:

Dear Dr. A.J. Turkblossom:

I never said her name, all I said was that she was that guy's wife. He could have been an old fashioned mormon?

Thanks Buddy,

Unca Karl

Now Karl, you know that things don't always work that way. For example, if I said I was talking about "Satan's Stick Bitch" we'd all know I was talking about Ann Coulter. Although Beelzebub himself might file a well-merited defamation suit.

Yesterday we linked to articles about Karen Hughes and her recollections on the outing of Valerie Plame and the fact that she seemed to have some knowledge of the matter. It was also reported that she had testified before the Grand Jury.

Further, here was the ultimate Bush insider being appointed to an Ambassador level post to deal with the Islamic World (in which I think it is safe to say, she is no scholar). Seems like an good reason to explore the Bush Administration's policy as well as further expose the mendacity of the Bush Administration. Some of us may have been expecting a Democrat or two to be there to thoroughly examine Ms. Hughes.

Friday, July 22, 2005

On July 22, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) denounced the latest efforts of the Bush Administration to block the release of the Darby photos and videos depicting torture at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison facility. On June 2, 2004, CCR, along with the ACLU, Physicians for Human Rights, Veterans for Common Sense, and Veterans for Peace filed papers with the U.S. District Court, charging the Department of Defense and other government agencies with illegally withholding records concerning the abuse of detainees in American military custody. Since then, the organizations have been repeatedly rebuffed in their efforts to investigate what happened at the prison.

In June, the government requested and received an extension from the judge stating that they needed time in order to redact the faces of the men, women and children believed to be shown in the photographs and videos. They were given until today to produce the images, but at the eleventh hour filed a motion to oppose the release of the photos and videos, based on an entirely new argument: they are now requesting a 7(F) exemption from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act to withhold law enforcement-related information in order to protect the physical safety of individuals. Today’s move is the latest in a series of attempts by the government to keep the images from being made public and to cover up the torture of detainees in U.S. custody around the world.

Joseph Darby was the U.S reservist who turned over the photos and videos to U.S. Army officials and touched off the Abu Ghraib scandal in April 2004.

“This is absolutely unacceptable,” stated Michael Ratner, President of the Center for Constitutional Rights. “We can not move forward from this scandal until we have a full public accounting and independent investigation into what happened at Abu Ghraib. The government cannot continue to hide evidence of torture. The time to release these photos and videos was a long time ago.”

Expectations are that the FOIA request will release more than 100 photos and 4 videos, all believed to document deplorable human rights violations by U.S. military personnel against Iraqi civilians.

From today's Democrat sponsored hearings on the Plame Matter and why a Republican is coming to testify:

I submit this statement to the Congress in an effort to correct a malicious and disingenuous smear campaign that has been executed against a friend and former colleague, Valerie (Plame) Wilson. Neither Valerie, nor her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson has asked me to do anything on their behalf. I am speaking up because I was raised to stop bullies. In the case of Valerie Plame she is facing a gang of bullies that is being directed by the Republican National Committee.

In her book "10 Minutes from Normal...and 4 Hours of your life you will NEVER get Back" Karen Hughes wrote the following:

"But regardless of the source, the leak compromised the confidential identity of a longtime public servant, which was wrong, and unfair to her and those who worked with her. Whoever did it should come forward and not hide behind journalistic ethics for his or her self-protection."

Okay, this is getting complicated in exactly the way that attempting to study a tempest in a teapot is complicated -- because it's so small. Scooter Libby says he learned of Valerie Plame's identity from Tim Russert. Evidently, Russert told the special prosecutor he did not reveal Valerie Plame's name to Scooter Libby

Is somebody lying? Maybe -- but on the other hand maybe there's a lot of weaseling going on here and some of it is Tim Russert's.

Oh, how I shall enjoy looking at the Corner in the next few months if indictments come down.